All are 7.6 and up, other than my poor HDDs ... they are stuck on 5.9. I have a pair of WD 1TB Blacks in RAID0 with a 20gb SRT cache, which dramatically improves my system responsiveness and boot times, but doesn't do a damn thing for my WEI score.

Mine is the hard drive, at 5.9. Next weakest is my CPU, unsurprisingly, at 7.3. My RAM comes in at 7.4, and both graphics sections show 7.8. The videocard is easily the high point of my build, so that's what I'd expect...

The issue is when I play Guildwars2 at 1900*1200 with all details maxed, the frame rate is low when things get crowded, and I think it has more to do with the Video Card than the CPU. If I replaced the 460 with, say, a 570 or AMD/ATI 7950 that would help the framerates out more. But the WEI gives a higher "rating" to the graphics than the CPU, which in my case at least, seems a little arbitrary. I recognize that it's nice to have a benchmark that comes "bundled" with the OS, but at least make it more detailed (or show the details of what it is measuring).

I think the disk score for my Win7 VM is only as high as it is because the virtual disk is sitting in the host OS's file cache. The underlying volume is actually a pair of Caviar Blacks set up as a software RAID-1, so not something you'd expect to score a 7.1.

7.0, 7.0, 4.9, 5.9, 5.9 on my work laptop. (i7-640m, 8GB RAM, NVS 3100m, mech hdd) Not sure how WEI weighs graphics subscores with professional graphics, and I just can't convince our IT person to buy me a SSD....only using 50GB on my internal drive since everything is on the network.While I do agree what WEI is mostly worthless garbage, it does provide some entry level sight into potential system bottlenecks for unknowing users. Plus it's fun to compare with others. (like we're doing here)

I'm interested to see who has the lowest subscores and what type of hardware is giving that score.

Last edited by DPete27 on Tue Oct 16, 2012 3:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

CPU is my lowest but it does what I need it to. I've thought about getting an i5-760 but then I realize I could just OC my CPU and get similar performance. I tried *very* briefly a few times but didn't feel like tweaking voltages too much so *meh*

MadManOriginal wrote:CPU is my lowest but it does what I need it to. I've thought about getting an i5-760 but then I realize I could just OC my CPU and get similar performance. I tried *very* briefly a few times but didn't feel like tweaking voltages too much so *meh*

Your CPU is sad and you should be sad!

Just kidding.

For what it's worth, there are some real gems to be found. I just recently ran across an i5-2500K that has no upper limit. I accidently set it for 5.5GHz on first boot and it just said "OK, sure, let's try that." That sort of OCing makes me panic, though, so I backed it back down to stock (3.3/3.7Turbo) and have slowly been edging it up. Still on all stock voltages currently doing a multi-day run of Prime95-64 and a looped compile at 4.8GHz. Of course, before that were two different i7-920s that wouldn't OC at all, so I feel your pain.

MadManOriginal wrote:CPU is my lowest but it does what I need it to. I've thought about getting an i5-760 but then I realize I could just OC my CPU and get similar performance. I tried *very* briefly a few times but didn't feel like tweaking voltages too much so *meh*

Your CPU is sad and you should be sad!

Just kidding.

For what it's worth, there are some real gems to be found. I just recently ran across an i5-2500K that has no upper limit. I accidently set it for 5.5GHz on first boot and it just said "OK, sure, let's try that." That sort of OCing makes me panic, though, so I backed it back down to stock (3.3/3.7Turbo) and have slowly been edging it up. Still on all stock voltages currently doing a multi-day run of Prime95-64 and a looped compile at 4.8GHz. Of course, before that were two different i7-920s that wouldn't OC at all, so I feel your pain.

I hope you are anthropomorphizing my CPU and not insulting me

It was a side-grade from a Q9550 when I wanted to use integrated graphics for a while due to crazy work hours. I look at it this way: I have a free upgrade waiting for me when I feel like really getting into fine tuning the voltages.

MadManOriginal wrote:CPU is my lowest but it does what I need it to. I've thought about getting an i5-760 but then I realize I could just OC my CPU and get similar performance. I tried *very* briefly a few times but didn't feel like tweaking voltages too much so *meh*

Your CPU is sad and you should be sad!

Just kidding.

I hope you are anthropomorphizing my CPU and not insulting me

It was a side-grade from a Q9550 when I wanted to use integrated graphics for a while due to crazy work hours. I look at it this way: I have a free upgrade waiting for me when I feel like really getting into fine tuning the voltages.

Well, it's an i5. It could be worse, could have been an i3, right!?I rather like the i5-2520 in my laptop. Intel really got the Arrandale/Sandy/Ivy Bridge generations right, in lots of ways.

just brew it! wrote:I think the disk score for my Win7 VM is only as high as it is because the virtual disk is sitting in the host OS's file cache. The underlying volume is actually a pair of Caviar Blacks set up as a software RAID-1, so not something you'd expect to score a 7.1.

Yeah, I'd imagine the benchmark is trying to force disk flushes, and the VM likely doesn't pass that along.